Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Republicans move to impeachment President Obama over Benghazi

You really need to read the comments on the site.


"Jim Inhofe mulls 'I-word' after Benghazi"

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) said the fatal attacks on American diplomats in Benghazi could lead to President Barack Obama’s impeachment during a radio interview Friday. “People may be starting to use the I-word before too long,” Inhofe said during a discussion of Benghazi on “The Rusty Humphries Show.”

“I-word meaning ‘impeachment?’” Humphries asked.

“Yeah,” Inhofe said.

Humphries pointed out it was unlikely the Senate would vote to convict Obama even if the GOP-controlled House voted to impeach.

“I understand that,” he said. “I’m not talking about it now. This is something that could last until after the 2014 elections. This is not a short story. … This is clearly an orchestrated cover-up.” Republicans have been musing, with varying degrees of seriousness, about impeaching Obama almost since his first day in office. Most recently, Reps. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) and Trey Radel (R-Fla.) suggested impeaching the president over his use of executive actions to advance gun control.

Inhofe zeroed in on U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s appearance on the Sunday political talk shows following the attack as the impetus for the scandal. During those appearances, Rice acknowledged the presence of “extremists” at the diplomatic compound in Libya, but fingered a poorly made and offensive viral video as the root of the violence.

“They knew that it was a cover-up at that time, the time that it happened,” Inhofe said. “To send Susan Rice out to lie to the American people is one thing that’s going to go down in history, that’s never going to be forgotten.”

Four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, died in the attack. Republicans have spent the past week building up Benghazi as a scandal after the issue faded from the scene in recent months. The House Oversight Committee held a emotional and lengthy hearing on Wednesday and documents outlining the development of Rice’s talking points were leaked to ABC on Friday morning.

Like other Republicans in recent days, Inhofe has taken direct aim at then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, claiming her famous clash with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) at hearing in January was essentially staged by the former First Lady.

“I think that she has gotten by with that sort of forceful attitude,” he said. “It’s something you’re not really accustomed to or hear from women as much as you do men. And she came out so forcefully, and you could tell that it was orchestrated at the time that she said it.”

by Anonymousreply 7208/09/2013

They have worked themselves up into a slavering, mindless Republican lynchmob.

They are just asking for their guy or gay to be impeached at some future date.

I hope cooler heads prevail in the Republican hierarchy.

Oh wait -- what does Rush Limbaugh say? Grover Norquist?

by Anonymousreply 105/13/2013

There's something orchestrated all right, but it isn't a coverup.

by Anonymousreply 205/13/2013

The Republican Party has become a haven for Fascists who are shitting on our democracy.

by Anonymousreply 305/14/2013

They continue to stain their brand. They need to try and focus on stuff that will help fix this country or they will be out on their asses in 2014. They are not doing themselves or this country any good.

by Anonymousreply 405/14/2013

The Republicans will go nowhere but to the fundraising bank with this. It is all high dudgeon and cash and more of the same "get the nigger" attitude.

Benghazi is nothing more than a shot across the prow for Hillary. But the Republicans will nominate another unelectable candidate so it will be EIGHT MORE YEARS OF DEMOCRAT GOVERNANCE!!!

It will rival the Roosevelt years.

by Anonymousreply 505/14/2013

Rethuglicans are evil, but Obama deserves impeachment over the NDAA, the Patriot Act extensions, the drone strikes, the IRS scandal...

Maybe if they impeach him we can finally get rid of the rotten core that is DC and split the country into smaller nations that can govern themselves at a more local level.

by Anonymousreply 605/14/2013

[quote/]Maybe if they impeach him we can finally get rid of the rotten core that is DC and split the country into smaller nations that can govern themselves at a more local level.

SeparatistMary!!!! Oh dear.

by Anonymousreply 705/14/2013

I called this the day after Obama's re-election.

The win was so overwhelming that I just knew (and said) that they would try to pull a Clintonesque impeachment on Obama.

And voila!

If nothing else, the reich wing freeptard sore losers are consistent.

Oh, and they're also repulsive.

by Anonymousreply 805/14/2013

Im with you R6. Lest spit the country up into smaller nations. Texas will be the gun show state. The south can reunite and loose a second time. The bible belt states will ironically be called the muffin top states.

California which has the 5th largest economy in the world, will join the other liberal west coast states and become the most powerful of all. Say good by to all your Apple products, movies, TV, Entertainment, Silicon Valley, Wine Country, Yosemite, beautiful beaches and progressive innovators.

NY will be our sister country, sort of like Israel.

Oh, and Florida will be the Disney state state 24/7. Sex clubs will be for Furies only.

by Anonymousreply 905/14/2013

Thank god the special prosecutor statute has ran.

The same way we didn't go after Dubya is the same reason this will go nowhere.

by Anonymousreply 1005/15/2013

2014 - Dems will lose to R's in the Senate. And that will mean impeachment, real impeachment. Nixonian type not Clintonian.

by Anonymousreply 1105/15/2013

Want a laugh? Read this:

Cheney: Benghazi "One of the Worst Incidents That I Can Recall."

The man who was vice president during the Sept. 11 attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people in 2001 says that last year's attack in Benghazi was "one of the worst incidences, frankly, that I can recall in my career."

by Anonymousreply 1205/15/2013

Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years.

According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status within a month of filing, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval.

Lerner also appears to have broken with the norms of tax-exemption approval by granting retroactive tax-exempt status to Malik Obama’s organization.

The National Legal and Policy Center filed an official complaint with the IRS in May 2011 asking why the foundation was being allowed to solicit tax-deductible contributions when it had not even applied for an IRS determination. In a New York Post article dated May 8, 2011, an officer of the foundation admitted, “We haven’t been able to find someone with the expertise” to apply for tax-exempt status.

Nevertheless, a month later, the Barack H. Obama Foundation had flown through the grueling application process. Lerner granted the organization a 501(c) determination and even gave it a retroactive tax exemption dating back to December 2008.

The group’s available paperwork suggests an extremely hurried application and approval process. For example, the group’s 990 filings for 2008 and 2009 were submitted to the IRS on May 30, 2011, and its 2010 filing was submitted on May 23, 2011.

Lerner signed the group’s approval [pdf] on June 26, 2011.

It is illegal to operate for longer than 27 months without an IRS determination and solicit tax-deductible contributions.

The ostensibly Arlington, Va.-based charity was not even registered in Virginia despite the foundation’s website including a donation button that claimed tax-exempt status.

Its president and founder, Abon’go “Roy’ Malik Obama, is Barack Obama’s half-brother and was the best man at his wedding, but he has a checkered past. In addition to running his charity, Malik Obama ran unsuccessfully to be the governor of Siaya County in Kenya. He was accused of being a wife beater and seducing the newest of his twelve wives while she was a 17-year-old school girl.

Sensing something wrong when he and a group of Missouri State students visited Kenya in 2009, Ken Rutherford, winner of the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize for his work on banning landmines, determined that Malik Obama was an “operator” and elected to give a donation of 400 pounds of medical supplies to a local clinic instead.

“We didn’t know what he was going to do with them,” Rutherford told the New York Post in 2011.

It is also not clear what the Barack H. Obama Foundation actually does. Its website claims the organization has built a madrassa and was building a imam’s house but there is no other evidence that the nonprofit was actually helping poor Kenyan children.

“The Obama Foundation raised money on its web page by falsely claiming to be a tax deductible. This bogus charity run by Malik had not even applied and yet subsequently got retroactive tax-deductible status,” Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal and Policy Center, told The Daily Caller. Boehm described Malik Obama’s attempt to raise money as constituting “common law fraud and potentially even federal mail fraud.”

Boehm doubted that the charity is doing what it says it’s doing and wondered why the charity was given tax-exempt status so quickly after the evidence of wrongdoing came to light.

“How do you get retroactive tax-exempt status when you haven’t even applied to get it in the first place?” Boehm said.

Lerner continues to draw fire for her handling of the IRS targeting of conservative and citizen groups, but her colleagues have started to defend her, alleging that she behaves “apolitically.”

Larry Noble, who served as general counsel at the FEC from 1987 to 2000, hired and promoted Lerner. “I worked with Lois for a number of years and she

by Anonymousreply 1305/15/2013

Keep fucking that chicken, R13.

by Anonymousreply 1405/15/2013

R14, I'm sorry to report but "That Chicken" has legs.

by Anonymousreply 1505/15/2013

Oh, really R15? Like Greece Germany pulling out of the Euro? Like massive hyperinflation?

Anytime a Libertarian predicts anything, I know the exact opposite is going to happen.

by Anonymousreply 1605/15/2013

Is it Greece or Germany?

That libertarian paragon George Soros begs to differ-

"The controversial financial speculator George Soros believes that the existence of the common European currency and the unwillingness of Germany to guarantee the debts of the poorer European countries will eventually lead to the dissolution of the European Union.

"George Soros, also known as “the man who broke the Bank of England”, has been promoting the idea of Eurobonds i.e. special debt instruments backed jointly by all members of the European Union. The money obtained from selling such bonds would be used to finance the deficits of countries like Greece, Portugal, Spain or Italy."

When socialist liberals like Soros say that the euro is as good as dead, you should listen.

by Anonymousreply 1705/15/2013

[quote]Maybe if they impeach him we can finally get rid of the rotten core that is DC

Be careful what you wish for. After Watergate, the country was so in the mood for clean politics, it elected a D.C. outsider, Jimmy Carter. He has been the least effective president of my lifetime so far. Even the stuff I agreed with him about, he could not implement effectively. He did not know how to work the media to sell things to the populace. And he did not know how to marshal the powers in D.C. to get anything done.

by Anonymousreply 1805/15/2013

r18 you are the first person I've read on a forum who can actually explain to me why Carter is considered one of the worst Presidents. I was not born yet when he was President and when people talk about how bad (not as in corrupt like Nixon and Bush) Carter was, I never really got a sense of the specifics. Thanks.

by Anonymousreply 1905/15/2013

The Republican Party...or what is left of it...will probably go the way of the Whigs. Their party has been taken over by extremist; Christian zealots, homophobes, xenophobes, and the like. No longer is it the party of fiscal responsibility and less government intrusion into our lives. With leaders like Newt G., Michele B., and the like...their future is doomed.

by Anonymousreply 2005/15/2013

The Republican Party is history. They overreach on everything. Too many racists, homophobes, sexists, etc., to be a viable national party.

by Anonymousreply 2105/15/2013

The Republicans will try anything to derail Hillary as well.

Why? The Clintons know how to kick Republican ass.

by Anonymousreply 2205/15/2013

Devin Nunes - R-CA just told the Hugh Hewitt Show that the cloakroom of the House of Reps was WIRETAPPED!!

by Anonymousreply 2305/15/2013

With Benghazi, the GOP have what they think is a silver arrow that could possibly torpedo both Obama's presidency/legacy and Hillary's future nomination/election campaign.

It is just too tempting for these slack-jawed hate mongers to pass up.

The Left's coordinated effort should be SILENCE.

"Give them just enough rope so that they can hang themselves."

by Anonymousreply 2405/15/2013

[quote]When socialist liberals like Soros say that the euro is as good as dead, you should listen.

a. like the word "fascist", you have no fucking clue on earth what the word "socialist" means.

b. so when's that Euro collapse/default/hyperinflation supposed to happen? Because you've been masturbating that particular chicken on this forum for almost five years now.

by Anonymousreply 2505/16/2013

Republicans are such bad losers. All they ever do with Democratic Presidents is try to impeach them. If ever a Prez should have been impeached, it's Shrub for his lies with WMD. But Democrats are wimps and always want to play nice whereas Republicans are playground bullies and you didn't give them your lunch money.

Gee, if they did impeach Obama, who would be Prez? Biden. Who would he be obliged to choose as his Veep? Hillary of course, which would greatly increase her visibility, reinforcing her for a run for 2016.

Republicans: they cut off their noses to spite their faces.

by Anonymousreply 2605/16/2013

Republicans would sell off parts of the USA to keep their corporations tax free.

by Anonymousreply 2705/16/2013

With all the noise they're making over Benghazi, IRS, rape in the military and impeachment, it's clear that the Rethugs know how to fight dirty. They're the experts and the Dems will roll over and take it, as they've been doing for the past seven years.

Without the slightest doubt, the House will get more Rethugs and they'll get control of the Senate.

It all goes back to "Impeachment is off the table" - Nancy Pelosi's admission that the Democratic party is a bunch of weaklings who are not capable of fighting for the good of the people.

For the first year of his time in the Oval Office, Obama had Democrats in charge in the House and Senate, but the fool sat on his thumbs for a full year, waiting for The Consensus and doing nothing.

The Rethuglicans will continue to smash and bash this nation and things will get much worse. They're the experts and morons will continue to claim, "Golly gee willikers, all this impeachment talk means the end of the Republican party."

by Anonymousreply 2805/16/2013

who dat bees dion is? Dis racical. I be on da case.

by Anonymousreply 2905/16/2013

That's so funny R29. You're really clever.

by Anonymousreply 3005/16/2013

R29 thinks being a racist twat makes him "clever". Sad, really.

by Anonymousreply 3105/16/2013

The Republican Party knows it has a loser in this. All they are trying to do is to creep towards that 50% mark by changing a few minds across the country, and to firm up their majorities in the red states against a likely Clinton game-changer that could bring some other Democrats in.

They're afraid for Arizona, Arkansas, West Virginia, and even Texas. Not to mention Florida.

I suspect, though, that the American public isn't going to buy this overtly political game of exaggeration and fear-mongering. Ultimately, one wonders what the hell there is about point-in-time talking points that would be impeachable.

These people have no limits, discretion or sense of proportion. And eventually the backlash is going to be a mighty gainer for the Democrats. Putting Imhofe on the national news is one way to help ensure this.

by Anonymousreply 3205/16/2013

Exactly, R32.

by Anonymousreply 3305/16/2013

R31 what is really sad is that you have no sense of humour.

by Anonymousreply 3405/16/2013

"Nancy Pelosi's admission that the Democratic party is a bunch of weaklings who are not capable of fighting for the good of the people."

And yet we won in 2008 and 2012....

by Anonymousreply 3505/16/2013

R29/R34 sadder still is that you just have no sense. Period.

by Anonymousreply 3605/16/2013

Can't they learn anything from Clinton, whom they perhaps had more ammo on, and failed to take him out (although he was impeached), and now he's the most popular politician in the U.S..

Next to his wife that is.

by Anonymousreply 3705/16/2013

Ah, yes. The last refuse of the racist twat: "Hey c'mon, I was just KIDDING!"

by Anonymousreply 3805/16/2013

PPP just released a poll showing Hillary went up one point vs. Biden in a primary matchup. In December Clinton led Biden 61/12, now 63/13.

by Anonymousreply 3905/16/2013

We won in 2008 because of the incredibly inept Shrub and the collapse of the economy. We won in 2012 because of the constant drumbeat of racism, homophobia and fear-mongering from the right. Ad, Obama is a good campaigner; president, not so much. I said at the time, and I say again, the only time Obama acts like a democrat is when he's up for election, and since we don't have presidential recall, the next best thing would be impeachment. Trust my words: if the Pubbies bring up charges, Obama will suddenly turn into the President we wanted all along. He'll have to, because he knows that if the base doesn't support him, he's toast. When his job isn't on the line, he doesn't care -- you could even say he'd rather kick the base in the teeth if he had a choice, but when he needs us, he'll do what he has to.

by Anonymousreply 4005/16/2013

A "cover-up" is not a crime if what is being covered up is not criminal.

The Republicans are making impeachment just another routine political weapon as they have already done with the filibuster. It shows for all their talk of patriotism and the values of the founders, they care more about winning their little battles than they do about the Constitution.

When they are in office, the power of the presidency is unlimited and to question the government is treason. When they are out of office the President is a tyrant for implementing the policies he was elected to implement. They are disgusting.

by Anonymousreply 4105/16/2013

Thanks r39. PPP also posted a poll on HRC's post-recent Benghazi hearing.

In February:

Favorable: 49%

Unfavorable: 42%



Favorable: 51%

Unfavorable: 43%

by Anonymousreply 4205/16/2013

The dumbocrats are such pussies. Why do they not bring up the manymanymanymany lies Bush, Cheney and Powell fed the country in order to get us into a senseless endless money pit of a war that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of Americans and countless others? What a bunch of ball-less cunts.

by Anonymousreply 4305/16/2013

Funny how they never felt like impeaching Bush over the billions he lost in Iraq...and billions lost for no reason at all. Thousands of lives lost but no one even made a peep.

What a great country we live in!!

by Anonymousreply 4405/16/2013

r43 because it won't have much of an impact r43. It's been over 4 years since Bush left the WH. Remember when the Bushies tried to pin all of their problems on Clinton? It didn't get much traction.

I think Obama needs to ride it out by doing what he's been doing the past few days: release emails to debunk the Benghazi conspiracies; proclaim emphatically that he is just as outraged with the IRS as the rest of America are.

As for the AP debacle, well, that really is problematic, but not sure it's illegal.

by Anonymousreply 4505/16/2013

The only people who care about the AP scandal are those in the media. The general public could care less about it. In fact, they probably support what the DOJ did.

by Anonymousreply 4605/16/2013

Even stupid Republicans, know this investigation is complete and utter bullshit. Everyone is disinterested but it's kind of leaving a bad taste...people will remember that this Republican Congress did NOTHING. Nothing for the real people of America.

by Anonymousreply 4705/16/2013

R6 I agree that Obama needs to be impeached and that the Repubs are wicked.If they were so right why didn't they impeach Bush who got us into two illegal wars and The Patriot Act BS?

R18 Wrong, Bush was a worse president than Carter. 9/11 happened under Bush's watch because he thought Clinton was so obsessed with terrorism The Bush Administration concentrated more on Iraq.Bush also got us in two wars that will fuck up the Middle East and the world for decades. Not to mention the countless billions of dollars and lives that it cost. As bad as Carter was(and I lived during that time and I remember how bad he was0, Bush has surpassed him. Obama is becoming another version of W as well sadly enough.

by Anonymousreply 4805/16/2013

A reporter on one of the morning news shows said exactly that R47. He actually said "we journalists are not very popular in this country so this story is not getting a lot of attention from the public".

by Anonymousreply 4905/16/2013

[quote]Wrong, Bush was a worse president than Carter

No, you're wrong, r48. I didn't write that Carter was the worst. I wrote that he was the least effective, and I stand by that.

Carter had much better intentions than Bush, but was ham-handed in implementation. He didn't know how to handle the levers of government or pull the strings of power. So, again, be careful what you wish for.

by Anonymousreply 5005/16/2013

R3( Wasn't Clinton leading all contenders when she ran last time long before the primary season? No one saw Obama pulling that one out.She had the nomination locked up last time didn't she? However people saw through her BS and chose Obama instead. Don't be sure that HC has a lock on the presidency. She was considered a shoe-in last time ad look at what happened.

by Anonymousreply 5105/16/2013

With the release of the White House emails yesterday, Benghazi is effectively over as an issue. Oh sure, they'll whine about it for a while but they have nothing because there is nothing there.

The IRS thing is, for me, a non-issue. They should be ruthlessly scrutinizing every political organization that applies for tax-exempt status and turning down pretty much all of them. As it is, the issue cannot be connected to the President or anyone in the White House.

The AP thing is also a non-event. As far as I can see, the DOJ did the right thing. Even for those who disagree with me on that, it's clear that the DOJ did a perfectly legal thing and a defensible thing.

Even the odious Krauthammer is telling the Republicans to calm down. He can see that this is all being overplayed, to the eventual detriment of the Republicans. Luckily, they're stupid and they won't listen to him. They won't calm down or stop - they'll push this thing until they get their asses kicked for it in 2014.

That works for me, so please proceed, Republicans.

by Anonymousreply 5205/16/2013

R51, you're revising the history of how most people experienced the 2008 election on the Democratic side.

We liked Hillary *and* we liked Barack. It was a tough choice and most of us wanted both of them.

We like and support the President, just as we like and support former Secretary of State Clinton.

Anyone who is serious about Democratic politics knows that the nomination is Hillary's if she wants it.

by Anonymousreply 5305/16/2013

r53 is going to be in trouble with the Democrat/ic troll who is usually here 24/7 denouncing that anyone saying Democratic is a freeper. He'll be along here any minute.

by Anonymousreply 5405/16/2013

No r54. Freepers don't say "Democratic." They say "Democrat Party."

by Anonymousreply 5505/16/2013

The only problem is, the public doesn't pay attention. They were told about all this shit, and how horrible it is, and they won't hear about the end result, the findings. They already recall the first part, and that first part makes Obama look like the devil incarnate. Republicans got what they wanted essentially. They'll be able to continue the anti-Obama shit with a lot of independents.

by Anonymousreply 5605/16/2013

Shouldn't they be impeaching him for authorizing the murder of US citizens on US soil by unmanned drones?

Oh, wait, BOTH parties passed that legislation, so nevermind.

by Anonymousreply 5705/17/2013

Attorney General Eric Holder wrote a letter to Senator Rand Paul that states: “It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the President to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States.”

Holder explained to Paul that it is legal for US citizens to be murdered in a drone strike on American soil.

To answer Paul’s question of whether Obama “has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil and without trial”; Holder went on to assert that Obama “has the power to authorize lethal force, such as a drone strike, against a U.S. citizen on U.S. soil, and without trial.”

by Anonymousreply 5805/17/2013

Rand Paul is a homophobic, knuckle-dragging, ugly piece of shit.

by Anonymousreply 5905/17/2013

R59, what the hell does that have to do with murdering innocent people?

by Anonymousreply 6005/17/2013

For impeachment, the House of Representatives would need a simple majority for impeachment. They have that and that means he is impeached. When it goes to the Senate, they need a 2/3 vote and the Republicans won't even come close to that.

by Anonymousreply 6105/17/2013

The inmates run the asylum in the GOP now. The most rabid fringe element is now controlling the "establishment". Total case of the tail wagging the dog. I just don't understand why they keep placating these people. It's better to cut them loose than to keep losing again and again.

by Anonymousreply 6205/17/2013

R60, who says they're innocent? That's a stretch.

This is all a Rand Paul government hate fantasy, but I'll play along for a minute.

Police can already hunt down and shoot US citizens on US soil. You think drones can't be used? I don't see why not, nor do I see why the President of the United States would not order a US citizen-terrorist killed right here in the US, if that was the only way to stop him/her.

It wouldn't bother me one bit. If we can arrest them, fine. If not, kill those Boston Marathon fuckers before they set off that bomb or kill them afterwards. Use a drone, use a gun, run them over with a car, I'm okay with it any way you slice it.

We are not fucking around with these shitstains and the faster people wrap their minds around that, the better.

by Anonymousreply 6305/17/2013


then why not start a "Let The Red States Secede" movement?

Why try to keep states like NY, NJ, CA, etc. tied to states like TX, VA, GA, etc.?

Wouldn't we all be better off if we had an "amicable divorce" and let each state go their own way?

by Anonymousreply 6405/17/2013

Rand Paul is associated with Alex Jones. Google the name Alex Jones and see what kind of tin hat bullshit pops up. Insane. I can't believe this guy is in our government.

by Anonymousreply 6505/17/2013

R64 is nowhere near as smart as Abraham Lincoln, to no one's surprise.

Fuck you and your secessionist bullshit all over the DL tonight. The answer is NO.

by Anonymousreply 6605/17/2013

I dont believe in secession but I do think we need to reconfigure the representational aspects of Congress. There is no way that a state like North Dakota with no more than a million people should have the same electoral power as California or New York.

by Anonymousreply 6705/17/2013


what is your problem with secession?

And if you give NY 10x more power than ND, then don't you think the people in ND would just as soon leave the US? Why keep them in the union if they want to leave?

by Anonymousreply 6805/17/2013

[quote]then why not start a "Let The Red States Secede" movement?

Such a movement already exists.

[quote]what is your problem with secession?

There is this thing called "history." You should look into it. You might even learn something.

by Anonymousreply 6905/18/2013

CIA was smuggling weapons (MANPADS, etc.) out of Benghazi to the rebels in Syria in exchange for the WMD that the Syrians had received when they were smuggled out of Saddam's Iraq. Russia found out, got pissed, and met with Turkey's leaders. Turkey Consul General Ali Sait Akin, went to Benghazi, ate dinner w/Ambassador Stevens, told him things he didn't want to hear, and left. Less than 1 hour later, the compound was 'ambushed' leaving Ambassador Stevens, and 3 others, deceased.

Speaker Boehner refuses to apoint a special committee or even talk about it, as Speaker Boehner was in the loop from the beginning on the entire thing. As a last resort, he (along with many in another gov't branch) will claim National Security as the reason for silence and/or misinformation.

The truth will come out...

by Anonymousreply 7008/09/2013

You're a lunatic, r70. Please get the help you so desperately need.

by Anonymousreply 7108/09/2013

The South isn't economically sustainable. Let the Red States secede for ten years or so, and when they're in complete shambles, swoop back in and dominate them. Then renegotiate so they minimal influence.

by Anonymousreply 7208/09/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!